Over the course of the past few days, we have seen a remarkable transition for many cable news shows -- choosing to actually cover the news rather than actually arguing over a series of political viewpoints.
However, this way of thinking for many TV reporters has yet to sway Fox News personality Glenn Beck. On his radio program Monday, the pundit chose to focus on attacking those reporting that the troubles currently going on in Japan revolving their nuclear reactors were going to be in some shape or form similar to Chernobyl. Why does Beck not feel the two situations are the same? He explains in terms that only Beck can:
"You want to know why this won't turn into Chernobyl? Because the Japanese aren't the Russians. The Russians suck."
From here, Beck precedes to list all the "propoganda" associated with these reports, and finds yet another way to put his adversary George Soros into the discussion.
What ultimately makes this very situation worth debating is not just Glenn's stance, but the way he presents it. Could the reactor stories be getting blown out of proportion? Possibly -- but it is also due to the past reports from Chernobyl that many have a cause for concern. (Not to mention this coming after such a major disaster.)
Is this the wrong sort of philosophy to convey right after a tragedy, or do you applaud Beck for sticking to his guns?